Assessing Refractory Waste Management in Europe 

As part of the research conducted within the ReSoURCE project, understanding and improving waste management practices is crucial for advancing industrial processes. One of the key research areas for project ReSoURCE focuses on quantifying the volume of spent refractories and tracking their destination within the European waste management system. To address this, researchers Florian Feucht (Montanuniversitaet Leoben) and Simone Neuhold (RHI Magnesita) conducted a comprehensive study to assess refractory waste flows across Europe. The public deliverable, D3.1 Review Report on Refractory Recycling in Europe, presents a structured analysis of the current state of refractory waste management in the EU. 

Using a multi-step approach, the study:  

1. Reviewed scientific literature to understand the current knowledge base on refractory consumption and waste flows.  
2. Analyzed reports from industry associations to collect and correlate data on refractory usage and waste generation. 
3. Conducted surveys and interviews with steel and cement producers to gain firsthand insights into waste management practices. 

Additionally, four case studies on on-site and off-site refractory recyclers were included to provide real-world context. 

Key Findings from the Study  

• Limited Reliable Data: A significant challenge in understanding refractory waste flows is the lack of updated and transparent data. The most comprehensive study in this area remains Eschner’s 2003 report, which is still widely used as a reference. 

• Cement Industry Participation: Cement producers contributed more data, allowing for a clearer picture of internal reuse, external recycling, and landfill rates within this sector.  

• Steel Industry Data Deficiency: Response rates from steel producers were low, making it difficult to draw conclusive insights. Available data suggests a high percentage of refractory waste is sent to landfills.  

• Trend Toward External Recycling: Compared to earlier findings, the study suggests an increasing trend toward external recycling, although the overall volume of spent refractories has declined. 

• Mathematical approach: The presented approach for calculating generated spent refractory volumes can be applied to analyze refractory consumption and material flows across various industries, adapted to other continents, and used for forecasting spent refractory generation. 

Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement 

• Improved Industry Collaboration: A more active participation is necessary to obtain a complete picture of refractory waste flows. 

• Bridging Data Gaps: More structured and transparent data collection is essential to advance waste management strategies. 

• Policy and Regulation Support: Governments and industry bodies should further introduce incentives to reduce landfill disposal and promote recycling. 

• Innovation in Recycling Technologies: The automated sorting equipment will improve material separation and recycling efficiency. 

The findings highlight both progress and persistent challenges in refractory recycling. Cement producers have demonstrated some commitment to reporting and monitoring waste management practices, whereas data availability from the steel sector remains limited. Continued industry engagement and supportive policy measures could help improve recycling rates and reduce reliance on landfill disposal. 

Interested in knowing more? Check out this public deliverable on the topic D3.1 Review Report on Refractory Recycling in Europe.

References: 

Eschner, A. (2003). ECO-management of refractory in Europe. 8th Unified International Technical Conference
on Refractories.

Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) is a powerful analytical technique that is revolutionizing material analysis across multiple industries. By providing rapid, precise, and non-destructive elemental analysis, LIBS is playing a crucial role in enhancing efficiency, quality control, and sustainability. As shown in Demonstrator A, this cutting-edge technology is being integrated into real-world industrial applications to great effect.

Rapid Microanalysis in the Steel Industry

In the steel sector, LIBS has emerged as a viable alternative to traditional scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Unlike SEM-EDX, which can take several hours, LIBS completes high-resolution microanalysis in just about 10 minutes. Additionally, LIBS has the unique capability of detecting light elements such as carbon, a critical factor in steel production and quality assessment. This speed and precision make it an invaluable tool for steel manufacturers, allowing them to maintain high product quality while reducing analysis time and associated costs. Moreover, LIBS can be automated for inline monitoring, ensuring continuous quality control without disrupting the production flow.

Quality Assurance in Metal Fabrication

Ensuring material consistency is a major concern in metal fabrication. LIBS enables thorough inspection of metal workpieces before shipment, verifying their alloy composition and preventing costly mix-ups. This is particularly beneficial for testing metal components like pipe bends and coils, ultimately reducing the risk of incorrect deliveries and minimizing associated insurance costs. By incorporating LIBS into quality assurance processes, manufacturers can improve their reputation for reliability and avoid significant financial losses due to material inconsistencies. The non-destructive nature of LIBS also allows for repeated testing without damaging valuable components.

Incoming Material Inspection

Manufacturers rely on LIBS for rapid and precise incoming material verification. Whether assessing the composition of stainless steel alloys like V2A or V24A, LIBS ensures that only materials with the correct properties proceed further in the production line. This reduces the likelihood of production errors and enhances operational efficiency. In industries where even minor variations in material composition can have significant effects on product performance—such as aerospace, automotive, and medical device manufacturing—LIBS provides a crucial safeguard against defects and failures.

Material Flow Analysis for Bulk Goods

LIBS plays a key role in industries that handle bulk materials, such as pharmaceuticals and food production. The technology ensures quality control by detecting impurities in substances like salts and fertilizers. By verifying both minimum and maximum quality thresholds, LIBS helps maintain product integrity and regulatory compliance. In large-scale production environments, even slight variations in raw materials can impact final product quality. LIBS allows manufacturers to quickly screen incoming materials and make necessary adjustments before they enter the production process, reducing waste and improving overall efficiency.

Metal Scrap Sorting for Recycling

Recycling facilities use LIBS to optimize the sorting process of metal scrap, such as aluminum. The technique effectively distinguishes between cast and wrought alloys, allowing for precise classification into specific groups like the 1000-series. This leads to more efficient recycling processes and higher-quality secondary materials. LIBS enhances the economic viability of metal recycling by improving the accuracy of material separation, reducing contamination, and maximizing the value of recovered metals. Additionally, by automating LIBS-based sorting, recycling plants can significantly increase throughput while minimizing manual labor and associated costs.

Gas Analysis in Industrial Processes

LIBS is also making an impact in gas analysis, particularly in monitoring process gases such as blast furnace gas in steel manufacturing. Continuous analysis allows for real-time process optimization, leading to increased energy efficiency, reduced emissions, and enhanced operational safety. The ability to monitor gas composition in real time enables industries to fine-tune their processes, ensuring optimal combustion efficiency and reducing environmental impact. LIBS-based gas analysis can be integrated into industrial control systems, allowing for automated adjustments and improved process stability.

LIBS in the Mining and Geological Sector

Beyond manufacturing and recycling, LIBS is finding increasing applications in the mining and geological sector. It is used for rapid, in-situ mineral analysis, helping geologists and mining companies assess ore quality without the need for extensive sample preparation. This allows for quicker decision-making regarding excavation and refining processes. The ability to perform field-based analysis reduces costs associated with laboratory testing and speeds up exploration and production timelines.

Future Prospects for LIBS Technology

As demonstrated in Demonstrator A, LIBS is becoming an essential tool for industrial applications, and its adoption continues to grow. Future advancements in LIBS technology, including improved laser sources, enhanced data analysis algorithms, and miniaturization, will further expand its usability across industries. Portable and handheld LIBS devices are already making it easier for field operators to conduct on-the-spot analysis, reducing downtime and improving decision-making processes.

LIBS as an Industry Game-Changer

LIBS is proving to be a game-changing technology across multiple sectors, offering speed, precision, and adaptability. As demonstrated in Demonstrator A, its integration into industrial workflows enhances productivity and quality control, making it a valuable tool for modern manufacturing and material analysis. The continued adoption of LIBS across various industries underscores its potential to drive efficiency and sustainability in the years to come. As new applications and improvements emerge, LIBS is poised to become an indispensable component of industrial analytics and quality assurance worldwide.

Sustainable engineering is crucial in addressing global challenges like climate change, resource depletion and pollution. By incorporating sustainable practises in engineering design, environmental impacts of processes can be minimised, resources can be conserved and long-term societal wellbeing can be achieved (The role of Sustainability in engineering, 2024).

Technology developers often prioritise the economic performance of new technologies, processes or products whilst the environmental impact is often regarded as a secondary consideration. However, with the increasing environmental concerns we face today, it’s clear that both economic success and environmental responsibility are equally as important to assess and balance.

Two important tools that are used are “Technoeconomic assessments (TEAs)” and “Life cycle assessments (LCAs)”. These methodologies provide comprehensive insight into the technical viability, economic performance and environmental impact of a process or product to enable informed decision making (Mahmud et al., 2021).

Technoeconomic assessments

A technoeconomic assessment is a method of evaluating the technical performance and economic feasibility of a process. It combines process engineering design and economic analysis to assess the economic viability, scalability and market potential of a specific technology (Mandade & Nimdeo, 2022).

Figure 1 – Technoeconomic assessment steps (Sustainability science: TEA, 2025)

In order to complete a technoeconomic assessment, a preliminary design of the process is completed through developing a process flow diagram and a mass and energy balance. The process flow diagram maps out the equipment needed in the process and shows the steady state streams entering and exiting each equipment. The mass and energy balance gives the flowrates and composition of each stream in the process as well as the utility consumption of equipment. Developing this process design requires a thorough understanding of the process steps required to produce a product. It also includes selecting the correct equipment required for the process; sizing/designing the equipment; and calculating flows in and out of the equipment (Perry & Green, 2008).

Following process design, an economic assessment is performed. This utilises the equipment sizes, utility requirements and raw material usages calculated to evaluate the capital and operating costs of the plant (Perry & Green, 2008). A cash flow analysis is carried out to assess the profitability of the plant and a sensitivity analysis is often carried out to observe how varying certain process inputs can affect the economics of the process.

A TEA is a useful tool in decision making as:

• It can help identify where the technical bottlenecks are in the process and suggest improvements to maximise efficiency/ performance.
• It can help identify cost “hotspots” and therefore where priority should be placed for future development and/or optimisation of the process.
• It can help justify further investment for further engineering design work.

Life cycle assessments

An LCA aims to answer the following question:

“How environmentally friendly is the product I am manufacturing/ purchasing?”

A lifecycle assessment is a holistic and iterative methodology that assesses the environmental impacts of a product/process/service across its different life cycle stages (from raw material extraction to end of life) (Hauschild et al., 2018). An LCA study can be cradle-to-gate where a product is assessed until it leaves the factory gates; cradle-to-grave where a product is assessed across all 5 life cycle stages; or cradle-to-cradle where a product gets recycled at the end of its life and re-enters the life cycle (Hauschild et al., 2018).

Figure 2 – Life cycle assessment (Kundu, 2022)

An LCA asks questions like: What raw materials are involved in producing a product? How are these raw materials produced? How is the product itself produced? How much energy is used to produce the product? How was the product transported to consumers? How is the product disposed of/ recycled at the end of its life? Taking all these factors into account can be confusing and therefore having a clear framework like LCA is beneficial in ensuring that all emissions across the supply chain of a product are assessed.

To conduct an LCA, ISO standards 14040/44 are followed. The study consists of 4 phases: goal and scope definition, inventory analysis (LCI), life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) and interpretation (Hauschild et al., 2018):

• Goal and scope definition: This phase consists of outlining the purpose and boundaries of the study. It describes the most important choices taken in the study for example, the reason for the LCA, the functional unit of the study and a description of the system boundaries.
• Inventory analysis: This is the data collection phase where all the material and energy inputs and all the emissions and waste outputs for the product are gathered.
• Impact assessment: This phase is where the data that has been collected is translated into environmental impacts like global warming potential, acidification potential, eutrophication potential etc.
• Interpretation: This phase is where the results obtained from the impact assessment are analysed and environmental hotspots are identified.

There are many benefits to LCAs. The insights from an LCA can help with sustainable product/ process development as “hotspots” or areas with the highest environmental impacts can be identified and hence design changes can be implemented to reduce these impacts. Moreover, the results from an LCA can help with regulatory compliance as the environmental impact data of the product is quantified. The results can also be used for marketing purposes as the data is factual and obtained from a reviewed and comprehensive study. Supply chain optimisation can also be achieved as the whole supply chain is assessed in an LCA and therefore, more informed decisions can be made (Golsteijn et al., 2024).

Combining TEAs and LCAs for sustainable process design in Project ResoURCE

While TEAs and LCAs provide valuable insights independently, their strength lies in their combined use. When used together, these assessments offer a broad view of a process’ performance ensuring cost effectiveness and environmental sustainability.

As part Project ReSoURCE, which aims to develop automated sorting solutions for refractory bricks, the developed ReSoURCE sorting system (aka. the Raptor) will be evaluated using a TEA and an LCA. This will allow for comparison against previously completed TEA and LCA studies on the currently used manual sorting site. By completing a TEA and an LCA for the automated sorting system, valuable insights on the economic and environmental performance of the modular technology can be obtained. These insights can then be used to support its improvement and justify its future implementation at different refractory production plants, contributing to a circular economy.

References

Golsteijn, W. (2024) Life cycle assessment (LCA) explained, PRé Sustainability. Available at: https://pre-sustainability.com/articles/life-cycle-assessment-lca-basics/ (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Hauschild, M.Z., Rosenbaum, R.K. and Olsen, S.I. (2018) Life cycle assessment: Theory and practice, Springer. Cham: Springer. Available at: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-56475-3 (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Kundu, V. (2022) Life Cycle Assessment explained, STiCH. Available at: https://stich.culturalheritage.org/life-cycle-assessment-explained/ (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Mahmud, R. et al. (2021) ‘Integration of techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment for sustainable process design – A Review’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 317, p. 128247. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128247.

Mandade, P. and Nimdeo, Y.M. (2022) ‘Techno-economic assessment of biofuel production using Thermochemical Pathways’, Biofuels and Bioenergy, pp. 653–671. doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-90040-9.00029-1.

Perry, R.H. and Green, D.W. (2008) Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ handbook, McGraw Hill Education. New York: McGraw-Hill. Available at: https://www.accessengineeringlibrary.com/content/book/9780071422949 (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

Sustainability science: TEA (2025) Sus Science. Available at: https://www.sustainabilitysci.com/technoeconomicanalysis (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

The role of Sustainability in engineering (2024) Motion Drives and Controls. Available at: https://www.motiondrivesandcontrols.co.uk/blog/engineering-ethics-and-sustainability-building-a-responsible-future (Accessed: 17 March 2025).

The daily life of a PhD student is a beautiful cycle of reading literature, planning experiments, conducting said experiments, taking notes, reading more literature, analysing data, writing conclusions, proofreading, realising your conclusions make no sense, reading even more literature, questioning your life choices, asking your postdocs for help, bothering your professor, getting valid answers, rewriting everything, and finally… submitting your manuscript for internal review.

After you receive your first devastating review, you are usually back to questioning your life choices. But after convincing yourself that quitting is not an option and you’ve successfully deleted that fast food cashier application you had written out of pure desperation at 2 AM, you start over. The internal reviews pointed out the weak spots in my manuscript. In addition to the red thread not being clearly recognisable and well-structured, my scientific English showed room for improvement. Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t awful (or so they said), but it wasn’t as precise and clear as it should have been.

Now, I thought my English was solid. I’ve taken English lectures, English exams, and I watch all my media in English, so surely, writing a paper wouldn’t be that bad, right? Wrong. Scientific English is a different beast.

After the whole writing, internal reviewing, rewriting, and questioning your life choices process, you finally end up with your first manuscript submission. Clicking the submit button felt like sending my soul into the void. This submission was not just a milestone but an essential step, as my doctoral thesis depends on at least three published papers, supplemented by a comprehensive text that integrates and contextualizes them. No publications, no thesis!

A few days later, I got an email: “Your manuscript is under review.” Nice. The provided tracking link became my most-visited website. Then, at the end of November, the moment of truth arrived — the reviewers’ comments.

To my surprise, they were… actually quite nice? I had braced myself for soul-crushing criticism. But instead, the comments were constructive and even encouraging. I had one month to address the feedback, so I tackled every point carefully — either making the necessary changes or (politely) justifying why something couldn’t be changed.

A few days after resubmitting, the acceptance email arrived. And now I’m just happy to share my work with everyone, unsolicited:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344925000370

I know that I’m in no position to give any advice, as I’m just a PhD student who was fortunate that my first publication went relatively smoothly. However, when I look around, I see my fellow PhD colleagues facing challenges similar to mine.

True to the saying, “There is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes 1:9), I would like to share my experiences:

Be patient, be persistent, and stay open to feedback. Turning research into a clear and well-structured manuscript is an art—one that cannot be mastered overnight.

A Global Leader in R&D of Cutting-edge Laser Technology

For 40 years, the Fraunhofer ILT has stood for exceptional expertise in the field of laser technology. Since its formation in 1985, the Aachen-based research institute has become one of the world’s top addresses for laser research and development, as well as for the transfer of new laser processes into real-world applications. The spectrum ranges from the development of innovative laser beam sources with customized spatial, temporal, and spectral properties and output powers to the development of specific solutions for beam shaping and beam guiding, frequency conversion, as well as design, layout and packaging of optical components. In addition, there is outstanding expertise in the field of digitalization, with broad application of AI and a high level of competence in software development.

Growing Impact on Sustainability and Efficient Use of Resources

On this basis, more than 550 highly specialized employees are shaping the transfer of cutting-edge technology approaches into seven technology fields which are Measurement Technology, Additive Manufacturing, Surface Technology, Joining, Cutting, EUV and Plasma Technology and Medical Technology. As highly precise, contact-free and massless tools, lasers have a constantly growing impact on modern industrial production, medicine and research, and also in electronics and semiconductor development. The Fraunhofer ILT is making this enabling role of photonics accessible to five markets in particular: Energy, Automotive, Aerospace, Microelectronics as well as Medical Technology and Health. But the range of applications is increasing: in environmental and recycling technologies, water treatment, in sustainable agriculture, for climate and weather monitoring from space or for the laser-ignited inertial confinement fusion as a climate-neutral energy source of the future, the laser technologies developed in Aachen are major trailblazers.

Core Task: Knowledge Transfer

Under one roof, the Fraunhofer Institute for Laser Technology ILT offers R&D, system design and quality assurance, consultation and education. Numerous industrial laser systems from various manufacturers and extensive infrastructure are available for R&D-work. In the adjacent Digital Photonic Production DPP research campus, companies cooperating with Fraunhofer ILT work in their own laboratories and offices. The basis for this special form of technology transfer is a long-term cooperation agreement with the institute. Benefits include the use of the technical infrastructure and the exchange of information with local experts. In addition to established laser manufacturers and innovative laser users, also start-ups from the fields of special plant engineering, laser manufacturing technology and laser measurement technology find a suitable environment here for the industrial implementation of their ideas. Another form of know-how transfer: More than 40 spin-offs have been established from the Fraunhofer ILT, all of which have successfully established themselves in their markets.

A top research organization at its back

Fraunhofer ILT is integrated into the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, which is one of the leading research institutions in Germany with currently 76 institutes and research units. Founded in 1949 the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft has nearly 32,000 employees, predominantly scientists and engineers, and an annual business volume of 3.4 billion euros. It plays a crucial role in the innovation process by prioritizing research in key future technologies and transferring its research findings to industry to strengthen Germany as a hub of industrial activity and for the benefit of society. For more information, please visit https://www.ilt.fraunhofer.de/en.html and the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft’s websites at https://www.fraunhofer.de/en.html.

On February 5^th, after 20 months into the project ReSoURCE, the consortium members had the project review meeting with the project coordinator Susana Xará. The main highlights of the achievements accomplished during the first 18 months of the project were presented. Thanks to the strong commitment and engagement from all consortium members since the proposal phase, we achieved a seamless project initiation from the beginning.

The ReSoURCE project content is divided into 11 work packages and all of them were kicked-off as planned in the proposal. During this period, Material management and Sampling (WP1) was already timely finalized, while the other 10 work packages are still ongoing. Also, 12 deliverables have been successfully submitted. At this stage of the project, a major part of the pre-financing amount has been allocated towards implementing activities throughout this year and a half.

During this stage of the project, two milestones were successfully achieved. The first milestone is the achievement of defining, sourcing, and distributing feedstocks samples. The second milestone was reporting the feedstocks characteristics. Further details can be found in the deliverables published under the Knowledge Vault section.

During the review meeting, the scientific and technical aspects regarding each work package were thoroughly presented:

• WP1, led by RHIM: Achieved comprehensive feedstock identification and standardization in sampling and sorting, coupled with in-depth industry analysis. The material characterization was carried out by RHIM and MUL. The feasibility of these potential sorting criteria was aligned with the requirements on the sensor systems in close cooperation with NEO, LSA, ILT and INN. To use a higher percentage of the breakout material, RHIM defined preliminary sorting requirements in close cooperation with CPI and SINTEF for alternative usage of the material. This will allow to enhance the efficiency and sustainability impact of automated refractory recycling during exploitation.
• WP2, led by CPI in cooperation with MUL, RHIM, SINTEF: Successfully completed the base-line assessments and interim reports for both LCA and TEA.
• WP3, led by MUL together with RHIM and CPI: Conducted a comprehensive waste characterization, complementary to WP1, which offered insights into the leaching behaviour and chemical-mineralogical composition, particularly when considered in conjunction with grain size.
• WP4 led by MUL working in closely with RHIM, LSA, and SINTEF: Maximising fractions that are suitable for sensor-based sorting was validated with comparing conventional and alternate comminution technologies.
• WP5, led by LSA in cooperation with ILT, NEO, INN, MUL: Work on all individual components has begun and initial successes include the completion of the Demo A & Demo B lasers (INN), a first test setup for the HSI (NEO) and a first optical spectrometer combination (LSA). NEO manufactured 2 cameras for initial on-site tests at LSA facilities and integration onto Demo A.
• WP6, led by ILT in close collaboration with NEO, LSA, INN, MUL: Is running investigations for characterisation of the data structures from the individual sensors and classification of material with real sample material.
• WP7, led by SINTEF together with LSA, RHIM, MUL: Successful initial experiments on direct sorting methods for 0-5 mm refractory leftovers as pretreatment before recycling.
• WP8, led by LSA in collaboration with RHIM and SINTEF: The requirements for Demo B have been compiled illustrated in an initial prototype design. In addition, Demo A is currently under construction.
• WP9, led by Crowdhelix: Combining different aspects, ranging from innovative and future-oriented activities, through technical tasks related to clustering with other projects, aiming to prepare the ground and promote new outcomes and developments of the project results. The activities of the work package have been fully implemented in a seamless and productive collaborative environment, providing a solid background for the further development phase, which will be further developed in the project. RHIM in collaboration with CPI, MUL and STEF, is dedicated to the integration of sorted refractory materials into developing alternative materials and products.
• WP10, led by RHIM: Ensured that all good governance principles are respected while fulfilling the rules and obligation towards the funding agency. Furthermore, the rigorous project monitoring and regular evaluation of the project progress was conducted to ensure success so far.
• WP11, led by SINTEF working closely together with RHIM, MUL, Crowdhelix: The activities of exploitation, dissemination, and communication is still ongoing. SINTEF and RHIM are responsible for managing and overseeing this strategy, nonetheless all partners are actively involved in showcasing project results and ensure proper participation in relevant events. Among the initiatives that have been successfully achieved during this phase are the website´s launch, the opening of social media accounts (LinkedIn & X), and the creation of 3 project videos posted on the project´s YouTube channel. Furthermore, blogs posts, press releases, and two scientific articles have been published so far. Also, the project has participated in 8 events.

The ReSoURCE project will foster future twin ecological and digital transitions and will affect every part of the refractory industry. The result of this project will be the implementation of new technologies, with investment and innovation to benefit all project partners and the refractory industry. Moreover, the work carried out so far supports the consortium’s ambition in creating significant impact for the refractory industry and the EU regarding CO₂ emissions, recycling processes and energy savings.

When we started our project, I was very aware that most scientists are not professional communicators and are not necessarily comfortable interacting with media representatives. It has been one of the major themes throughout my professional life. There are many reasons for this, but there is one aspect that I have always found particularly sad: scientists, who are known for always being as precise as possible, are often afraid of being misunderstood. They are afraid that what they say will be twisted and end up being so far from what they wanted to say that they sometimes even feel ashamed of news articles about their work.

Effective communication is in general the key to unlocking the full potential of groundbreaking research projects. But there is no doubt that scientists in a recycling research project in particular should be able to communicate with the media – given that sustainability issues are not always discussed peacefully. On top of that, refractory recycling is a field at the forefront of sustainable innovation and requires the ability to explain most complex aspects to a diverse audience. I figured, media coaching for our scientists would be an invaluable tool. So I did a workshop with them this past summer.

In the media coaching we first went through some basics of communication: we started with the Shannon-Weaver model. This model is one of the earliest and most important models of communication. It was first published in the 1940s, in a paper named “A Mathematical Theory of Communication” and reduces the communication process to its absolute basics, namely a sender, a message, a channel, a receiver, and potential sources of interference. The sender encodes a message, which is then transmitted through a channel to a receiver. The transmission in the channel can be disrupted from outside, so the message could not get through. If it gets through though, the receiver decodes the message to understand the sender’s intended meaning.

The most important point of this model is that the sender can influence if the receiver understands the message. They can do so by figuring out what coding system is known by the receiver. In simple terms: if I know the receiver understands English but not Spanish, I should make sure to use English and not Spanish for my message. It is the responsibility of the sender to ensure that the receiver can understand the message. But: The receiver also needs to be willing to understand the message, hence the message should be an attractive one. One they would like to decode.

What exactly it is that is attractive to people is as diverse as the people themselves. It starts usually with the package: level of speech, length, and of course content. We need to accept that not everybody will take an interest in our research, especially not an interest in all the tiny little details of it. In the media training we covered how diverse the interests of people can be at the example of the Austrian population and the parameters like values, income, education, that divide this population in different groups. Newspapers respectively their journalists know exactly who their readers (= receivers) are. So, they will report on the topics that are interesting to exactly this group. That does not mean that other topics are not important – just maybe not important to this specific group. Another consequence from this might be that our scientists should emphasize different aspects: for some stakeholders the positive effect on the environment that comes from our project is the most important thing. For others it might be that developments like our sorting machine bring a competitive advantage.

With these two basics I hoped to explain that scientists can avoid to be misunderstood by making sure that their message is focused on what really matters, that this message is brief and that it should differ for each target group.

Another topic that we covered in the coaching is the function of journalists. Journalists have to be critical. If journalists don’t question if what we do with public funds is worth the money, they don’t do their job. Of course, our scientists were already aware of this, but knowing that this is important and being confronted with critical questions yourself, that is not the same thing.

We know that our project is worth the money and that what we are working on is really important. But that is not all it takes to navigate interviews and inquiries with confidence. In the media coaching we therefore practiced how to answer critical questions. In two groups our scientists asked each other the most critical questions they could think of and worked together to find the best possible answers. That was not only a very effective excercise but also a really funny one.

After all this, I have no doubt that our scientists will go with much more confidence in their next interview. I definitely wish them and the ReSoURCE project all the best and I am sure that they will be very successful.